Use of fully-automatic firearms and rapid-fire devices like bump stocks for crime, including mass shootings has been exceedingly rare. I haven't seen gun contro

Use of fully-automatic firearms and rapid-fire devices like bump stocks for crime, including mass shootings has been exceedingly rare. I haven't seen gun control advocates talk about this much until the Las Vegas mass shooting. Instead, they typically argue that semi-automatic rifles are too deadly in their original configuration. While I can understand the argument, it doesn't seem to be very rooted in reality given that their use in crime is exceedingly rare. The vast majority of crimes committed using firearms involve handguns. I think it's likely the people pushing for restrictions or bans on semi-automatic rifles want them as a stepping stone to additional firearms restrictions, as the data available suggests it would not have a significant impact on crime even if a ban greatly reduced the availability of such rifles. They're being targeted for bans because they're an easy target; it's easy to argue to the average person that there's no legitimate reason for civilians to have them.